1. Field of the Invention
The invention is in the area of hovercrafts.
2. Description of the Related Art
The prior art discloses various hovercrafts; however, none of these prior art devices exhibit the features of the present invention—that is, multiple, independently-operable lift chambers which enable the inventive hovercraft to surmount and overcome obstacles that block conventional hovercrafts.
U.S. Pat. No. 7,931,239 to Pedersen discloses a hovercraft with two pairs of counter-rotating fans to generate lift. However, Pedersen's device has only a single lift chamber—not multiple, independently-operable lift chambers as in the invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 7,748,486 to Mantych discloses a landing gear for a hovercraft. Self-leveling legs are used to accommodate landing the hovercraft on a sloped surface. However, the legs do not allow the lift chamber to be raised or lowered with respect to the hovercraft main body, as in the invention, nor does Mantych disclose multiple, independently-operable lift chambers.
U.S. Design Pat. No. D564,046 to Hetman shows two air cushions for a toy hovercraft—but there is no disclosure that the toy actually operates—that is, blows air through the cushions to generate lift. And in any case, Hetman's air cushions are not movable, much less movable independently of each other as in the invention.
U.S. Design Pat. No. D543,928 to Sanders, Jr. shows a hovercraft with a stacked rotor thruster and winglets. The Sanders, Jr. device does not show multiple, independently-operable lift chambers, as in the invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,592,894 to Johnson discloses a “spidercraft” with four large tires and ground effect wings for planing over rough seas or rolling over rough terrain. However, it is definitely not a hovercraft, and uses significantly different technology than a hovercraft. There are no multiple, independently-operable lift chambers, as in the invention. Moreover, in his specification Johnson discusses hovercraft only in the context of pointing out their disadvantages—disadvantages that Johnson contends his spidercraft device overcomes.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,522,470 to Stiegler discloses a hovercraft with two engines to drive forward movement and a trim compensator to direct the driving air jets and steer the hovercraft. However, there is only one fan to generate lift, and only one lift chamber—not multiple, independently-operable lift chambers as in the invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,560,443 to DuBose discloses a hovercraft with a segmented skirt to reduce plowing. DuBose's device has only a single lift chamber, which is very different from the invention's multiple, independently-operable lift chambers.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,377,775 to Rush discloses a combination hovercraft-motorcycle with wheels in front of and in back of the hovercraft section. However, in Rush's device the wheels are continuously operated, and cannot be raised and lowered to go in and out of service as in the invention. Also, Rush's hovercraft section has only a single lift chamber—not multiple, independently-operable lift chambers.
U.S. Published Appl. No. 2004/0094662 by Sanders, Jr. discloses a hovercraft with the capability of taking off and landing vertically (VTOL). Sanders Jr.'s device has only a single lift chamber—not multiple, independently-operable lift chambers as in the invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,619,220 to Ducote discloses a hybrid SES (surface effect ship)/hovercraft having a retractable flexible skirt, so that the device can operate as a high speed SES on open water and as a hovercraft on land. Ducote's device has only a single lift chamber, which is very different from the invention's multiple, independently-operable lift chambers.
U.S. Design Pat. No. D646,198 to Desberg shows a hovercraft with a single thruster to propel the craft forward, and steering vanes to control the direction of the thrust. The Desberg device does not show multiple, independently-operable lift chambers, as in the invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,260,796 to Klingensmith discloses a multi-thrustered hovercraft—but it does not disclose or suggest not multiple, independently-operable lift chambers as in the invention. Instead, Klingensmith's multiple thrusters are just used for controlling the movement and direction of the hovercraft more effectively.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,200,069 to Miller discloses a hovercraft that converts into a fixed work platform when it is in a desired position over water. As with the other devices discussed above, Miller's device has only a single lift chamber—not multiple, independently-operable lift chambers as in the invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,984,754 to Yarrington discloses a hovercraft with a heli-rotor at its uppermost point for propelling the craft. However, Yarrington's device has only a single lift chamber—not multiple, independently-operable lift chambers as in the invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,105,898 to Bixel, Jr. discloses a hovercraft ground effect vehicle that is capable of sustained flight. Bixel Jr.'s device is not really a hovercraft but instead operates on ground effect principles. It does not have a lift chamber—much less multiple, independently-operable lift chambers as in the invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,718,501 to Lawler discloses a self-trailering hovercraft with wheels that can be lowered to the ground. However, Lawler's device has only a single lift chamber, which is very different from the invention's multiple, independently-operable lift chambers.
In sum, none of the prior art hovercrafts disclose or suggest the unique features and capabilities seen in the invention.